Sad Puppies Update: Don’t forget to vote

For once I agree with GRRM. Everybody should vote. The deadline is coming up fast.

http://www.theguardian.com/books/2015/jul/20/george-rr-martin-hugo-awards-vote-game-of-thrones-science-fiction?CMP=share_btn_fb

 

Since we wrote a novella worth of giant blog posts back and forth, GRRM knows damned good and well the Sad Puppies campaign wasn’t motivated by racism or sexism, but that doesn’t stop him from casually tossing the “neo-nazi” accusation out there… but you should believe him when he says there was like totally never any political bias in the system. 🙂

Yay! The blog is back
Back from New Mexico and updates

224 thoughts on “Sad Puppies Update: Don’t forget to vote”

    1. If you were to believe some Internet sources, only sixty-something filking manchildren with way too much time on their hands qualify as true fans.

  1. I am so sick of this already. I am poor and can’t afford to vote in the Hugos, but this constant harassment is really pissing me off. I’m tempted to go ahead and buy a membership I can’t afford just to spite them. Seriously, screw them! I’m a true fan, and as far as I’m concerned I’ve been a truer fan of sci-fi and fantasy than they’ve ever been ever since my dad first introduced me to Star Trek, Battlestar Galactica, and Buck Rogers. Ever since I first picked up The Prydain Chronicles and couldn’t put them down, and followed up by immediately going to the library and checking out every Lloyd Alexander book I could at 7 years old, (eventually moving on to Tolkien, Lewis, and Baum). Ever since… Ah, hell, I could go on.
    As far as I’m concerned, GRRM can go to Westeros and get screwed by The Mountain.

    1. 40 bucks for a supporting membership. Set by $2 per week and you’ll have plenty in time to vote next year.

        1. You can vote in the Goodreads Choice Awards for free. However, it is probably too big to be freeped. Still – I find that one more interesting.

          The Hugos seem like a party. I might pay money to go to the show but I wouldn’t travel for it.

          Lots of people have there own little parties. Gun shows may be like that. I have my own party I like to go to with writers and speakers and things of that nature but it isn’t the Hugos. That one cost more than $40 and I do travel for it.

    2. I managed to scrape up the $40 (and somewhat regretted it in the next month’s budget).

      Just because, like you, I am pissed off. I will vote – after reading all of the works. Right now, I’ll most likely be crucified by the Chorfs and pissed on by (some) Puppies, because I am doing it very honestly. (There is a difference there, think about it…)

      I’m not reading the Chorfs, though. I don’t want to be pushed into voting politically – because they would lose, and lose badly. I do wonder whether that will be the result, and what they will do about it.

      In some future year, will we see something like the Espys – where a football player is being raked over the coals today because he DIDN’T APPLAUD LOUDLY ENOUGH when the “Caitlyn” took the stage for its “courage” award? Will some poor soul be destroyed because he (or she) didn’t have a fainting spell for pure joy when N.K. Jemisin is handed the rocket ship?

    3. No way I am forking over 40 bucks to participate in an internet culture war dressed up as pursuit of SF award quality. If I want to fork over money for politics I will wait for Hillary to win her award. Amen?

        1. I am thinking of the nomination. Seems a better use of 40 bucks when it is time for the main event. But hey if you guys get a thrill out of going after the SF establishment – go get em. I am content to leave them undefended.

          I did read GRRM article and while it seems straight forward enough, I will have to decline his request to participate. Even if I thought the Hugos were in danger of a right wing take-over – so what? There are more prestigious awards with lots more fan participation. And I notice Scalzi isn’t concerned. I read his blog as well.

          I also notice JK Rowling was so impressed with the Hugos that when she won it… she didn’t bother to show up. But you guys carry on. I missed the first few puppy shows and this is fun to watch.

          1. I’m nominating the Clinton Foundation’s tax return for the 2015 fantasy novella. It even has two real dinosaurs in it.

          2. Larry may be an accountant, but I suspect he didn’t do any 990 work. Even so he should have some passing familiarity with the form – enough to know how boring 990s are. So you might asking him about the wisdom of that nomination.

            But the good thing is – it is free. Anyone can see the Clinton Foundation tax return. Like many nonprofits, they list them on the website. So that’s good. You won’t have to wait for the packet and free is always nice.

            Now from what I hear the short fiction nominations are not very good. I don’t care. I don’t read short fiction. But to a critic like yourself, do you think the 990 would be an improvement?

            If you nominate the Clinton Foundation Audit, fans get to read the footnotes. Joy.

          3. You lost me at “short fiction nominations not very good”. John C Wright? Tom Kratman? Lou Antonelli? Not very good? Yeahhhhhh, right.

            Nice screenname.

  2. “…that doesn’t stop him from casually tossing the “neo-nazi” accusation out there…”

    We all paid our $40. That means SP votes are as valid as CHORF votes. Everything else is just window dressing.

  3. To be fair to GRRM the guardian quotes him like this:
    “Who are all these new supporting members? Are they trufans rallying to the defense of one of our field’s oldest and most cherished institutions?” he asked. “Are these the neo-Nazis and rightwing reactionaries we have been warned of? The truth is … no one knows … All I know for sure is that every vote will count … Let this be fandom’s finest hour. Vote.”

    This is the full paragraph from his blog:
    Who are all these new Supporting Members? Are they trufans rallying to the defense of one of our field’s oldest and most cherished institutions? Are they Sad Puppies, Rabid Puppies, Happy Kittens, Gamergaters? Are those dreaded SJWs and ASPs and CHORFs turning out by the hundreds and the thousands? Are these the Neo-Nazis and right-wing reactionaries we have been warned of? The truth is… no one knows. We may get a clue when the ballots are opened and counted, but even then, the numbers may well just say, “Answer cloudy, ask again.”

    In the full context the Sad/Rabid puppies are distinct from the neo-nazis. The guardian just left that part out when quoting him.

    1. And what is George R. R. Martin? Is he a famous and successful fantasy writer? Or is he secretly a child molester who drowns kittens in his bathtub for amusement?

      The technique can be used on anyone. By anyone. Only idiots fall for it, but it’s easy to use.

      Also, has George R. R. Martin stopped planting terrorist bombs in orphanages? (The “Have you stopped beating your wife?” question format).

      Again, easy to use. 😀

      1. I just realized the social justice crusaders remind me of the cast of Happy Days if the cast were creepy racists and perverted sexual supremacists. Martin’s the owner of the diner. Altogether, a real hep crew.

    2. A newspaper using selective quotation? I’m shocked I tell you! Shocked!

      “Are they trufans rallying to the defense of one of our field’s oldest and most cherished institutions?” he asked. “Are those SJWs and ASPs and CHORFs turning out by the hundreds and the thousands?”

      -shrug-

      1. Depends on the tree, the type of bark, and the diameter of the trunk.
        Some bark you could get a collar around, while other trees have a smooth bark that would make the process difficult.

    3. This. I’m going to be forcibly pollyannaish, and give GRRM the benefit of the doubt that after bitching about “CHORF”, he’s not going to stoop to actively calling us “Neo-Nazis”.

    1. Thank Ghu – I’m not the only one behind the curve…

      Of course, I made the mistake of doing the graphic category first – that took three days of brain bleach to remove.

      1. I’m saving that one for last. Getting everything else sorted out. The novels are taking a while. There are two I get the same reaction I get to Pratchett or Douglas Adams. Great books, but I can only take so much at a time due to some style elements. They keep pulling me back so I’ve taken to alternating between them. Good writing indicator: I keep wanting to know what happens next even if I can’t take the story in large chunks.

  4. Dissembling like this is exactly what I’ve come to expect from George Rape Rape Martin. Don’t worry, Rape Rape, I won’t forget to vote. I can guarantee you won’t like what I vote for, though.

    1. As much as I normally avoid childish name taunts, that made me giddy. I’ve read some of his short works too, and the topic comes up too often for comfort. And too explicitly. That, and there is rarely anything like a healthy romance.

  5. Takes a lot of chutzpah (and no small lack of self-awareness) to call someone a neo-Nazi on the one hand, then deplore that person’s alleged use of epithets on the other.

    Just goes to show that self-proclaimed “moderate” leftists are SJWs under the thin veneer…

  6. Voted. I kept GRRM’s posts in mind when I voted. Perhaps not the way he would have liked, but I was definitely influenced by him. He and Scalzi are actually the ones that got me off my butt to buy a membership and upvote some of the SP slate. Oddly, I didn’t blank check the whole thing – sorta breaks their narrative of Wendell’s private army of drones doing as he commands, goosestepping along with perfect synchronicity.

      1. Oh, he does. He has all kinds of robotic death-machines capable of raining down death on the enemies of manatee-kind.

        We’re just not them. The Sad Puppies are Wendell’s allies, not his mindless slaves.

        1. But…but…I’m not one of his mindless slaves? OH, THANK YOU VERY MUCH! Now I have to find a different way to explain away the voices… 🙂

    1. It was Kevin Standlee that got me to buy the membership and vote (not that I’ve voted yet, I still have a couple of stories to read…). It was just so frustrating seeing someone so upset by new people joining the club, that I decided maybe I should jump in and try to reform the Hugos. Fact is, whenever I see I book with an award, I assume it’s a soap box for the author, and probably poorly written, but I would REALLY like to see that change, and actually be part of something that I can point out to other people with pride and say, “Yeah, everything that says ‘Hugo’ was a really good book. You should try it.”

      Eh, maybe that’s dreaming, but the truth is that unless we work to change things we don’t like, we’re pretty worthless as human beings. He made me realize that this was something that wasn’t going to change on its own, and the Sad Puppy push gave me hope that change could happen.

      Now I sound preachy. At least my soap box is an appropriately themed blog, not a book some poor soul made the mistake of buying.

  7. Latest but of crazy I saw was someone saying that that Puppies now all plan to vote No Award to prove we’ve been put-upon when we lose.

    1. SJWs always lie.

      Both puppies slates have been saying for months to read and vote.

      It’s the SJW sites that have been saying “Vote Noah Ward!”

  8. For non-biased, they sure use right-winger enough. And no one is foolish enough to read Martin’s comments without getting the meaning of: “Are these the neo-Nazis and rightwing reactionaries we have been warned of? The truth is … no one knows … ” How “fair” is it when he claims “no one knows,” when everyone most certainly *does* know. It’s a lie and an intentional passive aggressive attack. I wish he’d spend more time concluding his doorstoppers so we could maybe get a conclusion than trying to assert fallacious politics.

    1. “Are the puppy opponents the bunch of totalitarian haters we’ve been warned of? The truth is, no one knows.”

      Gee, somehow we don’t see quotes like that from Martin, do we?

      Comedy in real life: when I commented on one of his posts, saying I believed people who said they’d been insulted, even spat upon by CHORFs, he couldn’t understand how anyone could believe that.

  9. Come on Larry, the full quote is “Who are all these new Supporting Members? Are they trufans rallying to the defense of one of our field’s oldest and most cherished institutions? Are they Sad Puppies, Rabid Puppies, Happy Kittens, Gamergaters? Are those dreaded SJWs and ASPs and CHORFs turning out by the hundreds and the thousands? Are these the Neo-Nazis and right-wing reactionaries we have been warned of? The truth is… no one knows.”

    He didn’t accuse sad puppies of being neo-nazi’s, he rehashed both sides claims and accusations.

    1. Oh come on, Josh. The truth is everybody does know. The only neo-nazis are in Irene Gallo’s imagination. Words mean things. GRRM knows that. They flippantly toss out nazi trying to poison the well against their opposition.

      Hell, there was a JEWISH RABBI arguing with GRRM about that exact point, and when GRRM found out the rabbi was a Rabid Puppy supporter rather than an SP, GRRM lectured the Jewish rabbi about how he was incorrect in his assessment that Vox wasn’t racist, and how he’d expect a holy man to turn the other cheek. 😀 I’m sorry, that’s comedy gold right there.

      1. Words do mean things, which is why there is a difference between “casually tossing the “neo-nazi” accusation” and “Are those dreaded SJWs and ASPs and CHORFs turning out by the hundreds and the thousands? Are these the Neo-Nazis and right-wing reactionaries we have been warned of? ”

        If anything, he’s taunting the puppies for SJW name-calling and “his side” for Neo-Nazi name-calling. You taunt the SJW crowd for being overly sensitive and taking offense at the slightest provocation, this provocation is pretty slight. Though it is a great rallying cry to get out the puppy vote, can’t fault you for that.

        1. Do I look offended to you?

          Considering your comments explaining how the Guardian didn’t use the full quote are now four times longer than my entire original blog post, I’m going to go out on a limb and guess you are more worried about it than I am.

          1. I’d agree that I’m more worried about it than you. I’m interested because this Hugo Awards is a microcosm of the political climate in America. I think there are intelligent people on both sides of many issues and that for some reason both sides take great delight at saying the other side is stupid and their own point of view is the only valid one and that the other side is awful because of xyz. It’s rare that there are ever any earnest discussions that don’t immediately degrade into name calling and defensiveness and that this country would benefit from a good dose of toning down the rhetoric from both sides.

            I’m on here for two reasons: 1) Your books are a lot of fun. The passion you have for guns comes across in Monster Hunter and it’s contagious. 2) I consider myself liberal, am surrounded by liberals, and find it nearly impossible to understand conservative positions because they are almost always presented through a liberal lens along with all of its bias. The essay you pointed me to, where you wrote on your experience with and position on gun control is by far the most coherent and logical piece I’ve read on either side of the issue.

          2. In case you’re a friendly rather than a concern troll (This site gets a lot of those). There’s also a confusion of terminology. Around here, by and large, the way the name calling goes is ‘you have behaved in X, Y, and Z manner therefore A applies. External behavioral evidence to the contrary will be considered, your word is insufficient to mitigate the impact of your behavior.’ The other side tends more towards ‘You are A, therefore X, Y, and Z are how you will behave and all evidence to the contrary are lies and you trying to cloud the issue.’

            There are exceptions on both sides but those are the trends I have personally observed.

            You might try reading the ‘Internet Arguing Checklist’ from this site: http://monsterhunternation.com/2013/09/20/the-internet-arguing-checklist/

            Under ‘The Best of MHN’ link above go down to the ‘Politics, Fisking, and Trolls’ section to get a broader view of the perspective and many of the reasons for it… realize your host here is blunt and straightforward, there is no pussyfooting around the point int hose articles.

          3. Wyrdbard, thank you for the considered reply and pointer to the Internet Arguing Checklist. I don’t think I’m a concern troll, but stay tuned, maybe I am.

            I’ve seen similar rants from liberals as that internet arguing checklist, but about conservatives. It’s interesting to see how conservatives think/feel when faced with liberals. I don’t think posts like that serve any constructive purpose except to froth up ‘your side’ against ‘their side.’ There are poorly behaving and poorly arguing types on both sides. Larry’s been faced with some truly horrid threats from people, the same kinds of threats that liberals complain about. Shitty behavior knows no political bounds.

            I hear that you believe conservatives see the actions, then apply the label and that liberals see the label, then impute what your actions will be. My experience is that there are plenty of people on both sides that do both of those, and that an individual will act in both of these ways. It’s human nature to judge people based on a category you’ve given them. If in nature every wolf attacks you, you aren’t likely to sit around and wait to see if this wolf is going to attack you or not.

          4. Liberals aren’t wolves, they are just yapping little Chihuahuas pretending to be wolves who need to be punted. I don’t care if thousands of liberals show up and vote for the Hugos. This year has been a win as far as I’m concerned. The only surprise was the success of the Rabid Puppies getting such a huge number of nominations. It proves just how fragile their whole system is. Our side isn’t even organized yet but just getting started and it fills me with glee to see the shriekfest from the left as their CHORF ship goes down like the Hindenburg.

            Next year we will be more organized, our ranks will fill, and our frenzy from all the blood in the water will be marvelous fun.

            I will say this about y’all. “If You Were a Dinosaur My Love” broadened my perspective on what is science fiction and fantasy is. I might just nominate The Clinton Foundation’s tax report this time around. Not only is it a masterful work of fiction but it has two dinosaurs in it to boot! It might have to compete with Obama’s speech about his Iran-won’t-get-a-nuke-deal but I think Obama will be old news and Clinton 2.0 will be fresh for the elections. I figure it will be a good nomination as it will appeal to both conservatives and liberals alike.

          5. I have friends and family that are liberals Josh. I just don’t like most of their ideas and I’m sick and tired of the left painting me up as a Nazi. If you want to use wolves as an analogy then it is an apt one. Wolves don’t attack people but people fear them because they THINK they will attack because they look scary. I believe that government is the least likely to bring individual happiness and prosperity is all and that a free individual can best decide what is the best course of action. I fail to see how that can be perceived as a thinkcrime. Is your life diminished one little bit because I don’t like previous Hugo awards that meet the stamp of SJW approval? Most that I’ve encountered on your side Josh want to exterminate and erase my thinking. If the power were reversed I would not want to erase or eliminate you. Like the wolf, I just want to live free.

            Pushing back builds respect with your people Josh. Ignoring you has only brought pain and more of the same. Treat civility with civility and fire with fire. Humans seem to understand that.

          6. Josh, Actually, it’s not a matter of ‘believe’ so much as ‘After being on the internet for nearly 20 years, these are the trends I have observed and they have maintained in consistency and become more pronounced over that time.’

            By the way, you are approaching the ‘moral equivalence’ fallacy. “Well the other side is just as bad”. This is not always so. Part of the problem is you don’t seem willing to admit that the liberals could actually be in the wrong even in the face of hard physical evidence, at which point talking with you in a reasonable manner becomes difficult. I have the same issue with Young Earth Creationists. (In that case of all the ones I’ve argued with only ONE ever actually presented coherent, supportable arguments and I married him.) The ‘SJW’s argue like the worst of Young Earth Creationists on EVERY topic they latch onto, including using pseudo science, appeals to emotion, and hell fire and brimstone. They get even nastier than most of the Young Earth Creationists get. I have been told I’m going to hell by the YECs, but they have never threatened me with bodily harm nor jail time. They never told me I was delusional or should be in a mental hospital (nor tried to threaten my security clearance). They never said everyone like me should never work again. Just argued and tried to persuade. (And the ‘going to hell’ isn’t an ‘I’m sending you to hell’, for context.)

            Where I come from I’m actually left leaning. Where I spent most of my military career stationed I was a crotchety conservative out of date fogie (not hard when it’s Cali and Hawaii, in Cali picture a sniff and a nose lift and a long disgusted look, in Hawaii picture suspicion and a roll of the eyes and mutterings about conspiracies.) I’ve argued with people on all kinds of topics from all kinds of positions. Hell, one website my user name was ‘Devil’s Advocate’ because my job was to poke holes in all the arguments. All of them. Agree with them or not.

            Also on the checklist. I have gotten a ‘bingo’ far, far more often when arguing with the American Left than with the American Right. As mentioned in the article itself, there are certain points that the bad arguers on the right hit quite a bit. (And I think Mr. Corriea has argued with far fewer Young Earth Creationists than I have based on some of his evaluations, but he was an accountant, I’m a geologist. He’s more likely to get hit with economy debates than geology ones.)

          7. I have no stake in this matter – I dropped out once it became clear to me that I simply wasn’t in the position to make a statement about which side was right. I just didn’t have the knowledge, all I had was assertions by each side.

            Despite this, I would like to thank you for your attitude. You seem to actually love Truth, unlike many people. The amount of “arguments” I’ve seen online which consist of little more than name-calling and sheer assertion is truly distressing to me. Someone like you, who at least listens to his opponents, rather than hearing just what he wants to hear, is truly refreshing.

          8. Josh,

            I respect your attempt to look outside of your circle (I am not liberal, but I am surrounded by liberals). I further respect that you could see LC’s view on guns as one of the most coherent you have ever read. That’s exactly why I tend to fall conservative where I do – the liberal view is often incoherent.

            On the point here, with your fair mind open, I want to ask: To the average person, do you think it is more offensive to be called a “social justice warrior” or a “neo-nazi”? Just on the surface, what would you find more offensive?

            That’s why we say GRRM is obviously baiting the hook here. It’s not a symmetrical insult. Just because liberals have gotten used to hurling the insult doesn’t mean it’s not wildly insulting.

          9. Josh: Thank you, thank you, thank you.

            The last two sentences in your post above (“I consider myself liberal, am surrounded by liberals… is by far the most coherent and logical piece I’ve read on either side of the issue.“) pretty much sums up my experience. (I also have respect for people who are willing to acknowledge truth that goes against their interest.)

            On that specific issue (gun control), which I’ve been following for four decades, the passionate, logical, and coherent voices have always been there. However, when one “tribe” owns the mainstream media, the academy, the large urban areas, and one of the two major political parties, the passionate, logical, and coherent voices on the other side of any issue get caricatured or silenced. Gun owners have been subjected to what Dr. Michael S. Brown called, “..a thirty-year slow-motion hate crime”.

            A lot of liberals have no problem stereotyping gun owners as toothless, inbred, knuckle-dragging, racist, redneck morons, because in their minds, it’s true. Another lot of liberals don’t mind lumping the overwhelming majority of gun owners who are responsible gun and law-abiding together with violent felons, reckless idiots, and crazies because, in their minds, gun owners are wrong.

            It’s left some of us a little touchy.

            Anyway, if you’ve stayed with me this long, please let me suggest an essay as long, logical, and coherent as Larry’s but from a left-wing point of view:
            http://www.thepolemicist.net/2013/01/the-rifle-on-wall-left-argument-for-gun.html

            In a way, the Polemicist gets to the heart of the matter in a way that few right-leaning pro-gun people do: you either believe that “…The citizen’s right to possess firearms is a fundamental political right… to deny the state the monopoly of armed force” , or you don’t. If you do, you will never seek to overtly or surreptitiously eliminate that right, and will view regulations and restrictions of that right with skepticism. If you don’t, there is no barrier to eliminating private ownership of firearms and there is no regulation too severe or onerous to be placed on them.

            Enjoy.

    2. Come on, Josh. Many of us have already read the full quote. The point is, The Guardian also read the full quote and decided to use the excerpt they used with an intent to lead the audience to a desired result. This post is about what was presented in that Guardian release. If GRRM doesn’t agree with the way his words are used, then he can request a retraction or clarification to include the full quote.

        1. Ummm…. He is commenting on the words that The Guardian used which were attributed to GRRM. Did you miss that part where I said, “If GRRM doesn’t agree with the way his words are used, then he can request a retraction or clarification to include the full quote”

    3. Are you saying GRRM is so bad at communicating in the written word that The Guardian and his opponents (who are opposite Guardian generally) both find it probable that he was poisoning the well with the neo-Nazi accusation, when he totally didn’t mean that?

    4. Actually, the the three questions, as written are not exclusive of each other’s memberships. Yes, certain of the groups mentioned are exclusive of the others, but there is no exclusion in the questions themselves. Thus, if he were to have answered the questions with a declaration of memberships, he could easily have said that they were Sad Puppy SJWs who were right-wing reactionary neo-nazis. And that would not have violated the conditions of the questions. It would merely induce vomiting in any one of the groups mentioned.

  10. We really need to clarify something. The SJWs behave Just. Like. Nazis. Read any good history of Germany in the 1930’s and you will see that SJWs behave Just. Like. Nazis. Who behaved Just Like the communists they were competing against for power.
    Thanks Larry for all your heavy lifting and the VISA is in position for a November purchase of SBS.

    1. Agree, his comment was more tongue-in-asscheek — a bit jocular but trolling SP hard and his own side hardly at all.

      Plus, he said the nominees suck, so FU GRRM.

  11. More than anything, it amuses me to no end to see GRRM and other ageing SF leftists of his generation becoming the Establishment that the younger generation is rebelling against.

  12. Read and voted. Didn’t give any to Noah Ward, though some of the categories were pretty freakin’ empty.

    1. The biggest surprise for me was novel, where only 2 of the five left me looking to spend any money on the author’s other work (of the five, one was already “yes, for whatever”, one was “yes, but provisionally to try to the next”, two “probably not” and one “I can’t believe a novel with these events can be so utterly, utterly boring”).

      1. I really only found one to be something I’d have nominated.

        Another, I dislike the subgenre in general, so it was DOA for me. A third was bland, pleasant, and dumb – something I might read for free, but would never spend money on. #4 was… not the author’s best work. And #5 was utterly unreadable drek.

      2. I love the genre and I couldn’t even get through any of the nominations but the one I’d already read. Love me some Dresden Files.

        1. I spent all of Three Body Problem looking forward to the Plotasaurus, only to realize that the highest life form on a truly lush world was a Plot Beetle.

          1. Three Body Problem started off quite interesting, it was cool seeing how another culture viewed things. It spun off the rails and became difficult to follow about a 1/3 of the way through. That could just be me though.

          2. I had the same problem. It might have been a lousy translation. I like Jules Verne’s ideas but his novels were boring as hell. It won’t get my vote for the Hugo but I do think it is Hugo worthy.

          3. Yep. Not as good as I expected given the praise, but interesting enough to be my second choice.

          4. It wasn’t just you, but I’m a bit more used to reading translated novels, so I’m a little more familiar to plot kudzu-ing.

          5. I’ve only read a few Perry Rhodan novels. I suppose German translates better than French. The novel did not sour me to future novels that he wrote. I hope they get a better Chinese translator. I enjoyed the Firefly slang Chinese. It was pretty cool when I read the translation.

          6. A good chunk of the stuff written by native English speakers seems to have that problem. Enough that I wonder if the “editing” and “curating” concepts are worth the trouble…

          7. I’m working my way through it. I’ve got a decent familiarity with that end of the world culture so I’m following pretty well. I’ve found a couple of spots where the translator tripped on word order. I’m definitely wondering how much got lost in translation as very often translation at this level requires as much writing skill as writing the original (sometimes I think more, because you have to convey what someone else meant accurately both to what they meant and the effect they were hoping to achieve while staying true to what they actually said which means enormous understanding of both languages and cultures and skill in making them comprehensible to one another.) I was a linguist for a while… That kind of translation is not a job I’d want.

          8. Oh yes. This is the ‘do we stay true to the translation or do we translate as it was meant to be said?’ dilemma. I’ve found that translated works tend to work better if you do the latter; and you can add the interesting footnotes later on. The manga Negima did this very well (also revealing how much sheer research went into the manga! Translations from ancient Greek, Japanese, Sanskrit, Latin…! and indepth explanations of the philosophies behind several concepts!) and I was quite sad when Kodansha didn’t do as much of it during the crossover from Del Ray to Kodansha volumes. They picked it up again later on, but it didn’t feel as indepth as the ones Del Ray was doing.

            That’s why I actually enjoy reading both fan-translated manga and the official ones. The good fan-translators often give more backgrounding than official ones, and sometimes pick better concepts to get the idea across than the official versions. (For example, I actually preferred the fan-translation use of “dowry” or “Trosseau” over the official Yen Press translation of “Cloth preparations” for Young Bride’s Story)

          9. A lot of that depends on training. For my experience our focus was meaning. Always meaning. We weren’t translating for pretty (I was military). We were translating for information, even if it was only a news article. Translating word for word almost never works right… especially when you get above tourist level exchanges. (Even there it can go painfully wrong.) A lot more of the academics I’ve met strove to translate closer to the actual words rather than the meaning (possibly because they didn’t think they should presume upon what the author meant.) Most of the professional translators seem to be in the ‘academic’ category where as most fans tend to be in the ‘what does it mean?’ category.

      3. I had two I liked in Novel. One was the latest in a series I already adore, the other had the pleasant surprise of a teenage protagonist who wasn’t whiny or annoying. Only made it through one of the rest, which was tolerable, though not especially enjoyable. #4 was an awkward and bizarre Luddite technobabble thing that was sliding rapidly into the surrealism abyss when I jumped ship. And #5 was just a sample, so I didn’t even bother.

      4. I already knew Skin Game would be tough for any of the others to beat in my opinion, and they didn’t. Three of them I couldn’t even get through very much of (and I guess I really do have a strong preference for fantasy over sci-fi), but Goblin Emperor was a very nice surprise. There’s one book that I likely wouldn’t have bought otherwise but ended up getting the audiobook for after reading 100 pages and have really enjoyed it. (It’s still second place to Skin Game, though.)

      5. I found three of the four novels I hadn’t read yet quite enjoyable. Butcher got my #1 vote. I expect to read the sequels to GOBLIN EMPEROR, THREE BODY PROBLEM, and DARK BETWEEN THE STARS regardless of whether they’re nominated for anything.

        Leckie, on the other hand, was just boring. I may finish it someday, but by the time the excerpt the publisher provided was finished, so was I.

        1. Dark between the Stars and Three Body problem are two I was flipping back and forth between. I could take them in small doses (ditto with Goblin Emperor, though for different reasons.) They were very good, just styles of which I am usually not fond. It’s a measure of how good they were that I kept plugging through willingly rather than out of a sense of obligation. Goblin Emperor had an issue with Register. They were going for high register and managed to get the right voice, but didn’t bother with the other trappings of the style. It’s a trick to pull off well (says someone who’s tried to do things in the Russian story telling style, as well as the Norse and a couple of others with varying degrees of success.) but it dragged the book down for me so it got ranked lower.

          I found the Leckie story maddening. It was like there was a great story there screaming to get out, but it kept getting ignored except when the writer got distracted and let the story take over.

  13. I know Brad Torgerson isn’t exactly skinny, but how does he qualify as a “group”.

    And to use the word “weak” after last year’s wonderful choice between “Dinosaur” and “Water”? That takes Westros sized balls.

    And to Connie Willis: go to hell. “Bullied and extorted”? How?! By buying a membership and voting on the ballot?

    It’s another damn round of Boss Tweed: They’re happy to let the hoi poloi vote on the short list just so long as the CHORFs get to do the nominating.

    1. I sometimes read the complaints about Puppies as being in the tone of old style country club members annoyed that they have to open their doors to those who are “not their sort”. It is not always, fitting, but often enough….

    2. “Torgersen himself usually maintains a civil tone in his blog posts, though I do disagree with much of what he says, but the comments that follow are often venomous, full of name-calling, personal attacks, lies, distortions, and hate speech. Anyone who ventures in to disagree is hooted down and torn to pieces…

      “But many of the Pups seem offended by the very existence of John Scalzi, N.K. Jemisin, Anne Leckie, Rachel Swirsky, etc.” – GRRM

      Whether purposeful or out of ignorance, that upside-down use of the words “hate speech” tells you the problem right there. I am not against the “very existence” of those writers; they are against mine. They support an ideology that amounts to a biological hatred of my skin and sex and racial incitement. And George wants to know why curse words bubble up to my lips? When the actual meaning of words is thrown out the door – BY WRITERS – what else is left?

      1. GRRM seems highly offended at leftists being called a CHORFs and a puppy kickers but is mystified by why we are offended at being called white supremacist, neo-Nazis, etc. It boggles the mind.

        1. Frankly, what GRRM finds offensive doesn’t interest me in the slightest. Kind of like the fiction he writes…

        2. It does. And notice how we are calling out individuals, not groups of tens of millions of people. Meanwhile the ideology we oppose goes after white privilege, rape culture and heterosexuality itself. THAT is what hate speech is.

          Never forget the empty-headed gay ideologue Liz Bourke’s column at Tor is named “Sleeps with Monsters” after a quote from the depressed confusions of the radical feminist Adrienne Rich. It is obvious who the monsters are. And never forget the wide-spread support Bourke has among the core SFF crusaders and Tor itself. Her latest post is more of the usual mindless attacks on men.

      2. What I’ve noticed — and this is not unique to GRRM — is that there is an automatic expectation (on the part of certain liberals in this field) that each and every conservative blog operator must “own” everything written in the comments. Now, I personally think File 770 has become a crazy pit infested with the worst of the Puppy-kickers. But I don’t fault Glyer just because Aaron Pound ate lead paint chips off the wall when he was a kid. Like me, Glyer seems to let anybody post whatever they way in the comments. Within limits. And since Glyer is on record disliking SP, it’s not a shock that his commentators are going to be overwhelmingly anti-Puppy. In fact, I think Glyer’s blog and its commentators have been proving most of our points for us. Especially regarding Cliquish, Holier-than-though, Obnoxious, Reactionary, Fandom is concerned. (wink)

        1. Speaking of Aaron Pound:

          “Warboy Lich ‏@AaronPound · 4h4 hours ago
          Watching a thread where very deluded Sad Puppies are patting themselves on the back about how they are going to “WIN ALL THE HUGOS!”

          Where did we say that?

          1. In the Alternate Reality that our opponents spend most of they’re time in?

            Seriously, what color is the sky on that planet?

          2. Aaron Pound and Damien Walter are basically mental clones of each other. You could randomly parse out pieces of their diatribes, mish-mash those pieces together, and you’d never be able to tell the difference. They both hate Sad Puppies with ferocious intensity, they are both meaningless in the broader sense of the field — meaning, neither of them produces anything of merit — and they are absolutely desperate for people to pay attention to them.

    3. In Connie’s defense, she knows nothing about Sad Puppies, and doesn’t understand what’s actually going on. Which is true for a number of the older Trufen, to be honest. What they think Sad Puppies is, and what Sad Puppies actually is, are two very different things. And yes, I think your summation is correct. The taste-makers will give us our choices on a platter. If we don’t like it, that’s our fault — for being proles.

      1. Well, if that is true – then I despise her for not bothering to find out before creating a hateful screed.

        Either way, I despise her.

        1. I’m willing to cut her some slack, because it’s very likely that everyone she knows has been telling her the Sad Puppies are neo-Nazis. Most people don’t naturally assume “Everyone I know is lying to me,” which is why the Big Lie technique works so well.

          1. Yup. I am sure Connie’s circle has told her all about SP, and how SP is this evil scheme by bad men to do terrible things. Which is why it’s tough to be upset with her. She’s ignorant, and surrounded by a cocoon of people who want her to stay that way — while prompting her to be their sock puppet.

          2. she’s not the only one, sadly. before I withdrew from certain social media circles, I have noticed that a lot of the sad puppies detractors, were going off information provided by, well.. Scalzi, GRRM etc. never really bothered to visit yours or Larry’s blogs. I tried saying something to the effect of.. maybe you guys should see what the other side actualy says, rather then accepting what you are told by third party they say… that went nowhere. oh well. I still enjoy her books, so I’ll just keep separating the work from the author’s opinions i disagree with.

          3. Which “side” is it that finds people of the wrong sex, skin color, or orientation so awful that they create rooms where they can hide from the “other”?

    4. Yeah, wtf. If he’s going to call this slate weak (I’ll concede it could have used more Wright), I demand GRRM defend “Dinosaur.”

      How dare you bully and extort me with your dissenting opinions on what constitutes literary merit, you racist Nazi homophobe hate speaker!

  14. “Are they evil? Nobody knows.”

    “Um, have you tried ASKING them what they believe and seeing if their actions actually match up to the picture painted by the other si-”

    “NOBODY KNOWS. Nope! Nobody! No way at all to find out! Such a mystery, my gracious! Land o’ Goshen!”

    “But they’ve written and done quite a lot, shouldn’t it be extremely easy to resear-”

    “THERE IS NO WAY OF KNOWING.”

    “…..*…..”

    “I see by your silence that you agree.”

    *mutter mumble mutter gripe*

  15. Gotta say, I found reading many of the nominees a chore. The $40 was not the great deal I was hoping for.

    1. Hopefully if Sad Puppies keeps up and a progressively (In the technical rather than political meaning of the word) wider variety of things get nominated that’ll change. I”m not done with the packet, but I found some authors I want to investigate that I hadn’t known before or had been leery of (actually the Dresden Files has been one I’ve been avoiding because of current trends in Urban Fantasy… that will be slowly remedied.) I’ve got a bit left to go so who knows what I’ll discover? It’s not money wasted. I, thus far, haven’t felt I’ve made bank, but I also haven’t felt cheated out of that $40.

    2. I have to partially agree. I only found one novel to be award worthy. The rest went from just ok to flat out boring. That said, I’m in for next year. Three authors declined the nomination this year. The two I’ve read were both deserving of the award. I will seek out the third based on the nomination. The experience and the few good finds are worth the $40.00 for me.

  16. Anyone notice who GRRM left off his list? That’s right, it’s the “F”-word, the only one that actually matters. But go to GRRM cuz GRRM: expert. Remember, these are the people so up to date on fandom they think an “SJW” is the frickin’ Army of the frickin’ Potomac.

    Tippecanoe and Tyler Too, George.

    1. GRRM grates on my nerves. One minute he is praised by the SJWs and the next they want to throw him under the bus for all his rape scenes and yet he preserves his anger for us. The moment he is considered irrelevant he will be torn to pieces by his “loyal” SJW fans. I plan to bring those super big marshmellows for that roasting. Mmm-mmm!

      1. White male heterosexual left-liberals in particular tend not to understand the logical result of the politics they endorse ends with their own heads on those pikes they so admire.

        Shrug. There were black Democrats during Reconstruction, too. People are strange.

      2. Whedon is the same. They just can’t seem to realize that if you keep getting viscously attacked by your own side, they aren’t really on your side.

      3. He doesn’t get that the extreme and irrational hostility the SJW show toward him for his failure to write a medieval civil war as a Berkeley CA tea party and the extreme hostility they show us for our failure to recognize the superiority of poorly-researched revenge fantasies to space opera is exactly the same thing, and proceeds from the same motive — the desire to eliminate everything different in fiction than the personal experience of upper middle class lit-critter fans.

  17. It’s amazing to me how George and his buddies always have to throw in the neo-Nazi label label on those he takes issue with. My father fought real Nazis in WWII. He was shot in the leg by a Dutch Nazi U-boat commander who then interrogated him to see if he was the captain of the ship he had just sunk. My mother’s ancestors came from Germany to live in this country. They were Jewish.

    I know a little about real Nazis and none of the Sad or Rabids fit that mold. It offends me greatly when people like George continues to throw that card. That is why I won’t be buying any books from Tor or George. That’s okay though, there will be a lot to buy from Larry, Butcher and many authors I have discovered since learning about the Hugo controversy this year.

    Ron

  18. I hear George is so mad at us he’s only going to write a rape scene every 23 pages instead of every 17 pages to teach us a lesson.

    1. Well, GRRM’s running out of Starks to kill, so I guess he’ll have to find other ways to demonstrate his contempt for his fans…

    2. No, he’s going to teach us all a lesson by not writing his book until the Puppy controversy has been resolved to his liking. Because he’s still a young man with many productive years ahead of him, you know.

      1. Just tell him the gap between the last two Dread Empire novels, and dare him to top that…

  19. what the hell is a true fan anyway? does reading fantasy (and later sci-fi) for almost as long as i could actualy read qualify me? do you need to have read specific authors or specific number of books? I mean seriously? how can the same people decrying “fake gamer” label not see the irony in using “true fan” ?

    1. Leah, you don’t get to be a Trufan until you go to Worldcon for 35 years in a row, have completely become “one” with the culture there, and oh yah, it helps to be a liberal. You can be a conservative too, you just can’t be a “loud” conservative. Liberals can be as loud as they want. Conservative Trufen have to keep quiet.

      1. Probably something to that. It is a gathering of people that probably have come together for a bit. It’s their party. I don’t know their politics but if there is a world flavor to it, I suspect it is liberal by US standards. I doubt that their is a strong contingent of right wing tea sippers. That element is shrinking in the US culture, which is one reason the culture war is so strong. Look at the votes that really matter – the last one was 5 to 4.

        To answer Leah, I think what GRRM means by a true fan is one that is at the party for the sake of SF fiction discussions, panels, books, etc. Not someone is just promoting a culture war.

        1. with an assumption that this is what Brad and Larry are doing? promoting culture wars instead of promoting books they thing deserve to be considered? I have a feeling that regardless of my history of reading sci-fi and fantasy – I would NOT be considered a trufan. becasue I tend to like a lot of the “wrong” sci-fi and fantasy books. /shrug

          1. Yes I would say that’s right.

            I am not a true fan either. It isn’t my party. If it was down the street I might go for the fun of it. But my SF for most part isn’t nominated. I suppose Dresden is the exception.

            That’s not being critical of the what my perception of GRRM’s true fan. Just that the sub-genre’s I favor are not the ones that this particular group likes. Right now I am reading King’s “Revival”. Never going to be nominated. Neither will “Under the Dome”. Neither was “11-22-63”. Neither was the “Hunger Games”. Neither was Hugh Howey’s “Wool” series. Neither was any of the books in the Deborah Harkness “All Souls Trilogy”.

            That’s OK. The Hugo Awards was not on my radar till the current SP campaign blew up on the Goodreads Boards. Keep in mind the Hugonauts are a tiny group. I really trust the fans the make up my reading group and offer me advice more than the fans voting that Award.

            Funny. One of the books that won a Hugo I started and never finished. It was Phillip Dick’s “The Man in The High Castle”. Couldn’t get into it.

        2. “That element is shrinking in US culture” …are you referring to “right wing” tea drinkers in this statement? If you are, I’ve never done drugs recreationally, but I have *got* to try some of the sh*t you’re on! That high muist be *righteous* to produce such powerful delusions so utterly divorced from reality. Ask the corrupt, bigoted, puritanical Southern Poverty Law Center (I contributed to them for years. I woke up. I don’t contribute anymore. They were arguably good once. Now they are a laughable counterpart to the KKK.) whether conservative, “right wing” beliefs are dying out, in America. I mean, honestly… *shakes head slowly, in stunned awe*

          1. Yes – the tea folk are angry old white men watching their world slip away. Down to about 18% from the last poll I saw.

            The religious right plays less and less a part as their numbers dwindle as well. Fundamentalism is on the wane. The Nones are the fastest growing religious group in the US.

            Immigration is changing the complexion of places like Texas. So yes – that movement is dying out – literally.

            That doesn’t mean all conservative ideas are dying out. The Democratic Party is largely a conservative party in the US. We don’t really have a liberal party. It just means that particular element is dwindling. I doubt they go quietly.

          2. You’re totally delusional, then. None of what you say is remotely true. Well, in leftist cloud-cookoo land, perhaps…

          3. You remind of the eve of the election driving home with the bride listening to right wing radio. The radio host had a watch party at a local Dallas BBQ joint. He was talking about the coming Romney landslide. We just laffed. I don’t eat meat but I wished I had gone for the cole slaw. And the show.

            I wonder how this show is going to end? Can’t wait. Unlike the other one, I have no idea.

          4. If you’re talking about 2012…double check your numbers m8. Romney almost won. Landslide? No. But then, Obama didn’t win by anything close to a landslide, either. But I suppose delusional idiots have to assuage their self-hatred somehow. Laughter is as good a method as any.

            PS: angry white men? Seriously? Pass that needle, man! Or koolaid, or pipe, or bong, or hookah…whatever you’re using! That stuff sounds *awesome*! Somebody has better tell all those Latinos(as)/Hispanic folks, blacks, and Asians that oppose gay marriage and abortion that “SJW75126” has declared that they either don’t exist, or are white because s/h/it (she/he/it) said so! Aren’t they going to be surprised! Hell, my sister is gonna be thunderstruck. I know I am. Wow, you are a cotten-headed, realoty-challenged idjit, (as Bobby Singer would say) aren’t you? (Idjit=idiot, in case you were unsure) 18 percent? Damn. I may die laughing. Thanks for the injection of humor into an otherwise humorless day. 😉

            PPS: I would’ve voted for Obama, to my shame, but I was bedridden, and too stubborn to get an absentee ballot. I was determined to make it to the polls, and failed. Alas, fate saved me from shame. Or maybe not alas…that’s a toughie.

          5. Romney didn’t “almost won”. By election eve the odds of a Obama winning was well over 90%. And 332 votes was a pretty good spanking.

            The minority vote going Republican has about the same odds.

            This is why we were laughing listening to right wing radio. Same reason I am laughing now.

            I do hope history repeats. It is too early to predict but if Hillary pulls this off I may not see another Republican President in my lifetime. Demographics change slowly but they do change.

          6. At this point, it’s no more than even odds that Hillary even gets the Democrat nomination, nevermind being elected.

          7. Check Betfair. The odds are 1/5. The market makes the odds. If you believe the market is wrong, congrats on your profits. If you read Nate Silver’s site you will note that he references Betfair in one of his analysis.

            You might check the odds for next president while you are there.

          8. None of which has anything to do with the actual, on-the-ground facts, of course. I stick with my analysis, that Hillary has no better than a 50% chance of even being nominated.

          9. These are the actual on the ground facts. We all have our opinions. But if you want facts, the odds are much better than even. I gave you the facts.

            Now if you think the odds are wrong, you have a huge profit potential. You could even place a wager now and offset it later as the market settles closer to your prediction.

          10. You don’t. There are no facts at this time; it’s all opinion, including that of an online tip sheet. Do you really not understand what a “fact” is?

          11. Yes I understand what a fact is. The fact is odds are always an approximation of probability. Your statement that the odds are no better than even money is not a fact. That the odds that one can actually get is much higher than that is a fact. Betfair is not an online tip sheet. That is also a fact. It is an exchange.

            When Nate Silver pulls data from Betfair he may quibble about it (as he says). But he doesn’t dismiss it. Says Nate: “But Betfair data reflects market prices and is therefore a pretty good approximation of the consensus view about the viability of each candidate.”

            This is real money and real time. You think the market is wrong. Go make some money.

          12. Of course it isn’t a fact; it’s an opinion, just like what you posted. The difference is, I recognize that and you don’t seem to. Your “exchange” is still an online tip sheet. The only thing special about it is that the tips aren’t coming from a single tipster, but from a faux “market.” And “consensus view” actually means a group opinion developed from the subset of individuals interested in this market. That’s hardly representative of the general public. As I said, an online tip sheet, and not even a representative one.

          13. Thanks for making my point to Brad. How do you see the Hugo Awards playing out? What’s your take on how the puppy slates will do?

            That, I have very little data on and I what I have I can’t interpret. There is some discussion at File 770 but nothing more than a few raw numbers on total membership and number of votes cast to date.

          14. Actually, no. Your first sentence is a complete lie. And I say that from the perspective of someone who knew high ranking people in both campaigns. Citing the electoral vote is kind of stupid, since what determined 4 swing states came down to something like 600,000 people, which in reality was a nail biter.

            Oh, but wait… Never mind. This is the same dude who thinks Republicans are behind gerrymandering. 🙂

          15. just to note – I’m personally actualy pro-choice (I have no idea if I would ever go through with abortion myself – leaning towards no, even though none of my plans involve having kids, but I still want that choice to be available for others – its kinda like that with guns. people who don’t like them, don’t need to have them, they just cannot take away the right from those that do) and pro-gay marriage – since marriage in US is a set of mutual legal/tax benefits (at least when it comes to what that wedding license from city hall does), I see no reason to deny them to some couples in committed relationships but not others.

            it fun to be on a political spectrum that doesn’t fit into the neat boxes of liberal and conservative that we shoehorned this country into. Even libertarian doesn’t really fit anymore. at least when it comes to liking books its more of a personal thing. didn’t vote for anyone in the last presidential election and likely will not vote in this election either. I refuse to chose a lesser evil.

            as for Hugo’s (which were on my radar more or less – by the virtue of the awards being mentioned on book covers and librarian acquaintance making it a point to read all the nominees every year) some of the older nominations/winners DID fit within my tastes. just not the recent decade or so. and they DID claim to be “the best of sci-fi as voted by fans” not until this kerfuffle that we found out that means specific fans, rather then fans of sci-fi/fantasy in general. but hey, I got new writers for my book shelves out of that, so..

          16. It has to be specific fans. There are so few voting. Part of that is because there is an economic barrier. Who wants to pay $40 (did I hear $60 next year) to vote. Look how few votes it takes to move the dial. This is a private club for people that want to attend and until this year more votes came from those that attend.

            Compare that to the Goodreads Choice Awards. In 2014 there was over 3M votes. I don’t think that means 3M people but that’s a lot of activity. Go look at the winners and the margins. It’s free so people vote.

            SFF itself is very splintered genre. It’s a big umbrella. The various sub genres are not that much alike. “The Martian” and “Skin Game” are nothing alike.

            And when works are somewhat alike, the fans are not alike. I saw GRRM and Diana Gabaldon on a comic con panel together. Google for it; really entertaining. I think GRRM fans are well represented at the Hugos. But I don’t think Gabaldon fans are. There wasn’t any Hugo buzz for her 8th book in the series this year (“Written in My Own Heart’s Blood”).

            I think all this is great fun. And I enjoy discussing books with both sides. But when people tell me that the current fans are a clique, my reaction always is – yes, so what?

          17. The black and Hispanic folks who helped organize Tea Party rallies would like to know why they don’t exist in SJW75126’s tiny, overheated little head.

            (Houston and Dallas, in case you were wondering. )

          18. I did some political calling during the last presidential election. The organizers and the organization (and most of the phone conversations) were Hispanic. I was one of very few blonds in the room. (Albuquerque, in case you were wondering.) Not a majority, but a sizable minority. Our Republican governor is Hispanic, after all.

            Erasing minorities is what progressives do.

          19. It was a midterm. And it wasn’t a surprise. The same modeling that showed Obama close to a sure thing also showed the loss of the Senate. Heck those of us in the real world felt that was probable two year prior. That aside.

            Reversing gerrymandering will take longer. Again. Demographics change. They change slowly but they do change.

            Those kind of things are well analyzed and one doesn’t have to be Einstein to take advantage of the data. The thing I don’t have data on (to amount to much) is this culture war playing out in the Hugo Awards. I have no idea what is going to happen. That’s what makes it fascinating I suppose. I guess GRRM was saying the same.

            What do you think will happen?

          20. Okay, at this point, as a paraphrase/rephrase of a classic Roman (city, not Empire) joke puts it: why did you wipe your arse with your brain? (Original: who wiped their ass with my sock? Not me! I haven’t shit for three days!) Seriously. You realize Gerrymandering involves redistricting, right? And that the minority Republicans in the Senate had no ability to “gerrymander” states that they didn’t even have senators/only had one senator from? Right? Because if that fact is unclear to you, then continuing to converse with you is simply an exercise in moron-baiting and really seems mean-spirited. Battle of wits, unarmed foe and all that.
            In the faint hope that you do grasp the basic meanings of the terms you so enthusiastically insert into your fevered pronouncements of “fact” I will continue. If the Republican minority could not redistrict those states they lacked senators in, states that were Democratic strongholds (in at least one case) for one hundred years or more, regardless of districting quibbles, then such redistricting, also referred to as “gerrymandering” after the fellow that allegedly first utilized the practice, could not have influenced the 2014 midterms. Louisiana is a delightfully schadenfreude-inducing example. I thrive on the tears and tantrums of leftist, “Democratic” (the Democrat party bears no resemblance to the party as it started. It’s got more in common with the civil-war era Democratic party than the party started 200+ years ago) tyrants-in-waiting. And they were sure crying and carrying on when they lost Louisiana! Oh boy. And North Carolina? Hahahahahaha! One HUNDRED years! That’s two zeros! The Democrats lost a state they had dominated for a full freaking CENTURY! And not just representatives and senators! Noooo, even the STATE legislature went from blue as the bluest sapphire to red as a spanked Democrat’s bottom in the blink of an eye! Talk about schadenfreude! Goodness…just…whew. I need to take a breath. Got a little too excited and exuberant there. Anyway, in summation? You are either frighteningly ignorant, or shamelessly intellectually dishonest. Or both. Either way, as they say in the south: Bless. Your. Heart. (Pause in between words is mandatory. No, I don’t know why.) Have a nice day, and good luck with that hangover! 😉

          21. You do realize that the absolutely worst gerrymandered states are Democrat-controlled, right? Well, you probably don’t, being a leftist and all…as to the rest of your delusion, you’re just squinching your eyes shut as hard as you can and chanting to yourself, “We are TOO winning, we are TOO winning!” If you actually could be bothered to look at the real country, you’d notice that there is a rising amount of “Hell no, we’re not going to take it any more!” going on. The Tea Party movement dead? No, it’s just metastasized.

          22. Re: Gerrymandering. In general it’s been about Democrats trying to engineer “minority” majority elections so that minority candidates win. In practice what seems to be happening is that all the reliable “minority” votes have been shoved into districts where they get 90% of the vote during an election (and yes, they elect black congresspersons quite reliably) leaving more “diverse” districts vulnerable to small conservative majorities winning more races.

            Tactically… the best thing is for a party to have a district where they have a very slight majority… of that 90%, every single vote in the general was for Obama districts, 40% of the votes, everything over what was necessary for a “majority” are essentially wasted votes.

            Because Republicans are benefiting from this, the History re-writers are acting like it was the Republicans responsible for drawing ridiculous districts in order to ensure that minority candidates are elected. It wasn’t the Republicans… it was the Democrats… being DUMB.

          23. Yes – the tea folk are angry old white men watching their world slip away. Down to about 18% from the last poll I saw.

            Ah, yes. The carefully-manipulated polls (not to mention flat-out lies) make you feel comfortable and smug so you embrace them with utter glee.

            Go on, say you’re the “wave of the future” or “history is on your side” or whatever else you use to justify your actions.

          24. For one? Using my air without asking permission first. Aside from that…have you opened your mouth and subsequently permitted noises that were meant to form words to emit from that orifice (or any other orifice, to cover all the bases) anytime recently? If so, then that, too. Basically anything you do, voluntary or involuntary, requires a justification, in my not so humble opinion. I’m unfair like that. (With sjw’s at least) toodles!

          25. “The Democratic Party is largely a conservative party in the US.”

            I don’t know how you could say this with a straight face. But I do agree that the Democratic Party in about ten years from now will make the current one seem conservative to you.

            If you want a preview of what society will look like then, I suggest a book entitled “Brave New World”. That seems to have the sufficient freedoms you desire.

        3. I should add, if that *wasn’t* what you meant, I sincerely apologize, and can proffer only fatigue and the lateness of the hour as defenses of my indefensible rudeness. Pardon me. God bless. 🙂

      2. SJW: have you even looked at the history of the 20th century?

        This is the predictable part, about arguing culture with self-identifying progressives: they believe society and government are being propelled (kicked?) up this eternally rising ramp to some as yet unforseen nirvana of progressive perfection — with conservatives dragging their heels every step of the way. And of course progressives have always been on the side of “good” (cough, we’ll forget about cheering for the Soviet system, Walter Duranty style, cough) and conservatives have always been on the side of “bad” (cough, Republicans were the party that ended slavery, cough.)

        Except, that’s not how it works. History is a variably oscillating waveform. Ideologies come, and ideologies go. As soon as any ideology believes itself to be in a position of permanent dominance, that’s usually a good indicator that it’ll be declining in the not too distant future. Because change is the only constant.

        Of course, there’s the thing about how progressive economics always end in collapse. Always. No socialist economy has managed to survive for more than a century without falling apart and/or enduring major reform (cough, injecting capitalism and free markets, cough) and/or needing to be bailed out (cough, money flows in from capitalism elsewhere.)

        So, SJW, enjoy your “permanent majority” while it lasts. It’s not a demographics thing. It’s an inevitability thing.

        1. Brad, nice to hear from a head pup and nice of you to comment.

          You comment about the Republican Party and slavery can have two interpretations.

          On the one hand you might be equating LIncoln’s Party with today’s GOP which would be intellectually dishonest. Today’s republican party is not the party of Lincoln. It is the party of the red states that line up pretty much with the confederate states and that shift took place over civil rights legislation.

          On the other hand you may be illustrating your constant change paradigm by showing the change of the party since Lincoln. Really since Johnson. In which case, your point is well taken.

          Either way, I don’t expect to shift your thinking on political/religious matters – some of which I don’t disagree with concerning human inevitability. The reason I don’t is I understand that conservatives/liberals think differently – physically think differently. If we look at a brain one can’t tell anything about the race of a person because race as we use it, is a construct. But one can statistically correlate political orientation and studies show the physical brains are different. And all of us (left and right politically oriented) are not as rational as we pretend to be. When determining the sum of 2+2, we are rational. With political/religious arguments we are less so. We engage in motivated reasoning. That’s why political and religious arguments are not welcome at family holiday gatherings and social events.

          So, Brad – enjoy your point of view why I enjoy my “permanent majority” as you label it.

          What I point out here is that this dust up over the Hugos has little to do with quality of the books and the awards. It seems to me to be the US culture war infecting a tiny convention of SFF fans – world fans. I am very curious in how it plays out. Your tribe has managed to freep the nomination process. If you have data about what the outcome of the voting campaign will be or even a prediction, I would like to hear it.

          This board turned me on to File 770. There is a post on that site indicating that the TOR boycott has had no effect or a slight uptick in TOR sales. That boycott is also part of this culture war bleed over into SFF fandom. However, the populations of SFF fans that might buy TOR books is not the same as SFF fans that will pay $40 to participate in a SFF social event. So I can’t draw any conclusions.

          As for myself, I have no idea how this will play out. It has been entertaining. I will say that having read you “nice spaceship” article, you and I have very different taste in SFF. But then I seem to have different taste than the True-Fans as well.

          Anyway, voting done in a few days. How do you see this turning out?

          1. Dunno if the boycott is having an effect or not (except that I was saving money this year, until LC mentioned Bones 3), but it is worth noting that we don’t know Tor’s margin of safety on their sales.

            Not going to get into my very basic understanding of the accounting, but basically, it is possible that even a 1% drop in sales could drop Tor from ‘profitable’ to ‘not profitable enough’ or even ‘not profitable’ (if the numbers are already bad), and that the ways we have to measure their sales externally aren’t nearly that accurate. Without lots of internal data, guessing whether it has had an effect or not is largely guesswork.

          2. Hi Craig,

            A couple of things.

            1. The added publicity may actually be beneficial. I few days back my wife says to me “Tom Hanks is reading the Scalzi novels”. This is interesting because until recently I didn’t know who Scalzi was and the bride sure didn’t. But I was excited because I am an audiobook fan. But she burst my bubble telling me – “No, he isn’t narrating them, he is reading them.” Ah.

            But the point is, Hanks twitter registered with her. I bought the audiobook version of “Lock In”. I now check out Scalzi’s blog. That is the output of the campaign. BTW and off point – did you know “Lock In” is gender neutral? One can have the protagonist be mail or female. And the audio has both a male narrator and a female narrator. Anyway….

            2. Scalzi has a stock answer to these boycott threats. Basically, it comes down to the boycott is of McMillan so good luck with that. Here is his boycott response from 2014: http://whatever.scalzi.com/2014/10/23/how-to-boycott-me-i-mean-really-boycott-me/

            3. So the other thing I learn here is about File 770. That’s were I saw the discussion re Jason’s article – “Stick a fork in the pup’s Tor boycott because their hushpuppy is done” (July 22, 2015).

            http://www.jasonsanford.com/blog/2015/7/sticking-a-fork-in-the-pups-boycott-its-done

            All this data really tells me is that there is variance week to week but the averages pre and post look pretty comparable. So there is no indication of a drop. I suspect the impact is the other way.

            4. I do agree the data is meager and I would like to see more. But my expectation is that a boycott by a small number of people involved in a controversy where they occupy the minority position, may only serve to strengthen the sales position of the side occupying the majority position because the controversy increases the name recognition.

            5. In this case, we also have the mixed messages from the various puppy leaders. I think some of that is done on a “wink wink” basis but I still wonder if that has an effect on the boycott participation.

          3. @SJW75126 –

            Today’s republican party is not the party of Lincoln. It is the party of the red states that line up pretty much with the confederate states and that shift took place over civil rights legislation.

            Nice attempt at rewriting history, but you should know it won’t fly here. We know that Bull Connor was a Democrat, that almost all of the Southern legislatures that voted for the Jim Crow laws were Democratic, and that when the Civil Rights Act of 1967 passed (through a Democratic-controlled Congress), more than 33% of Democrats in Congress voted against it, while only 20% of Republicans in Congress voted against it. The internment of Japanese-ancestry Americans was under a Democratic president (FDR), the last Ku Klux Klan member to hold office in Congress was a Democrat (Robert Byrd)… I could go on and on. The “shift over civil rights legislation” that you cite was actually the voters’ rejection of racist Democrats and replacing them with less-racist Republicans. (Sadly, not all Republicans are free from racism either, but our history is better than that of the Democrats.)

            I can understand why you wouldn’t want to acknowledge the racist history of the Democratic party, but we know too much history to buy your attempted rewrite.

          4. “I can understand why you wouldn’t want to acknowledge the racist history of the Democratic party, but we know too much history to buy your attempted rewrite.”

            I think I did didn’t I? John Connally was a Democratic governor of Texas. He was in the car with JFK and got shot in Dallas. He switched and ran as a Republican. The south used to be Democratic – now it is Republican. It was part of the Republican Southern Strategy to attract disaffected white voters.

            There was a corresponding shift in minority voting patterns over time as well. African Americans used to vote for the party of Lincoln. Now the GOP struggles for African American votes.

            So I acknowledge your point. And embrace it.

          5. The real point is, today’s south is actually less racist overall than the northeast is. I know, I’ve lived in both areas. What probably happened is that the southern voters, rejecting institutional racism, tossed out the Democrats and replaced them with Republicans. That makes at least as much sense as you leftists’ nonsensical claim that “the parties flipped.”

          6. I was stationed in California for 13 long and weary years and then was sent to Texas. I can tell you that race relations in Texas are far and away better than in liberal California. I have Hispanic friends, relatives, and neighbors in Texas and the populace gets along very well. I did not have the same experience in California. I lived in the New York for a short term and there I met the worst racism of all the states that I have lived in. Hands down people get along better in Texas has been my experience and the racism is mild by comparison. Democrat controlled places have always been the worst managed places that I have lived in. SJW your rhetoric falls flat. In the south there is a huge population of minorities that have seen the light and have rejected the empty promises of the Democrats.

            As for the Hugos I think that what we will see is a greater participation from both sides. I think that the left will be shocked at the results either way. They will either be shocked because the Puppies will win many catagories or they will be shocked that in such a short time with little notice the conservatives rose up. We aren’t even organized yet. Next year you all will have a kaiju sized problem to deal with and it won’t just go away.

            Look at Gamersgate. The more people know about it the greater its ranks swell. The Sad Puppies ranks will grow and these populations will inspire more people to rise up in other areas. Comics and movies might be on the list next. We have been convinced for a long while that it was futile to push back but now it looks like the more we push the better the results. Get ready for some good SF/F stories in the future and say goodbye to the “If I gave a T-Rex a cookie my love” days.

          7. Thanks Ape. I also live in Texas. I would say my impression is different than yours.

            I am most interested in your assessment of the outcome of puppygate and you gave me that. I have no idea if you are right or wrong on that score.

          8. Isn’t it widely accepted that Kennedy (all of them, actually) didn’t like negroes *at* *all*? And you know, as Republicans go, Connally is just super duper popular. REally, he is.

  20. I voted this weekend and here’s hoping Butcher wins. While a bit off topic, I thought you might be interested in a vignette that illustrates the awards don’t equal sales observation and the dump Lovecraft crap. I took my daughter to Barnes and Noble to buy a gift for a friend and as anyone who has taken a 16 year old girl shopping can tell you, I had plenty of time on my hands. I wandered over to the SF/F shelves to see what was available and checking out the “L” section didn’t see a single Leckie book, not last year’s double award winner or this year’s nominee, but I did find 6 Lovecraft books, including the new annotated collection, which I bought. In the “C”s were 6 Correia titles and in the “B”s, not a single Butler, but an entire shelf of Butcher’s books. So let’s dump the old guy who is still selling and inspiring readers and writers for close to a century for someone who is nowhere to be seen in less than a decade.

    Larry, you should thank Baen’s art department for their marketing expertise. My eldest is starting his fourth year with Houston PD and had some use it or lose it vacation time, so he and his girlfriend headed to the beach for a couple of weeks. He dropped his dog off for us to sit and mentioned he’d picked up some beach side reading called Monster Hunter, as he said, “The cover has a guy hanging out of chopper shooting at a dragon, how could I not buy it.” I told him it was part of series by you and loaned him my copy of MHI. A couple of days later he texted me to say he’d read it non-stop and then ordered the rest of the series so they’ll be waiting for him when he gets home.

    1. *grin* I gave my hubby MHI to read while he was on lockdown on base for an exercise once, and about 3 am he texted me to say it’s all my fault that he wasn’t getting any sleep because he could JUST NOT PUT DOWN THE BOOK until it’s done and dammnit why did it STOP?!

    2. That’s kinda how I got my first John Ringo. Buddy of mine saw Hell’s Faire and brought it back for me. “ZT, I don’t know what in the heck is going on here, but this looks like your kind of thing.” I’ve been hanging around Baen ever since.

  21. FWIW don’t forget to vote on the Worldcon location. You have to print out and snail mail your response. Choices are Japan, Finland, Wash DC and… I forget.

    1. You clearly don’t understand leftist etymological practice, Sam. Whenever a term is believed to be pejorative to any extent, it is “interpreted” to apply exclusively to non-leftists. That’s how “Nazism,” a completely leftwing, statist, totalitarian philosophy, has been associated with people holding exactly the opposite beliefs. The left can’t have anything as distasteful as Nazism recognized to apply to their very near philosophical cousins.

      1. True. Nazi is short for National Socialist which was Germany’s right wing party in World War Two. The Germans didn’t have a right wing as we know it. They were voted into power because they were the “sane” alternative to the Communists. The Democrats of that same era would have been further to the right of the Nazis. The liberals in their confused reedit of history have made the term to make the Nazis sound as if they are closer neighbors to the Republicans. That simply isn’t true. The further to the right would be laisse faire capitalists or maybe the libertarians.

    2. Back around 1930, the Communists called the people to their immediate “right,” the Social Democrats, by the epithet “Social Fascists.” Anyone who wasn’t a commie or at least a strong fellow-traveler was some variety of “fascist” in their eyes. So this is really nothing new.

  22. When you vote, don’t forget to factor in your privilege and unconscious bias against marginalized groups. Remember, heterosexuality looks good on paper but can be too much of a good thing since in real life it produces children and extended families which can shame those without. Please consider the height and weight of the nominees or whether they suffer from incipient sociopathic paranoia. As last year’s great success shows, such inclusiveness produces warmth, compassion and a feeling of community. If you happen to go to WorldCon and meet a nominee in person, please do not look them directly in the eye or ask them needlessly aggressive questions about where they’re from, what their name “means” or touch their hair or genitals. Don’t wear clothing which shows your navel or draws attention to your buttocks by having shiny material tightly stretched across them in an unseemly fashion. Don’t take anyone’s pronouns for granted and when you vote consider whether the writer has a car or not as driving leads to more privileged communications with the hegemony and also tends to directly taint people with compulsory heterosexuality. Don’t talk to anyone unless they talk to you first, and when you do, don’t bark out commands as if you’re at a cattle auction. Try and steer away conversations from things such as playing frisbee or softball, as wishing such activities on congoers is often considered a sly death threat. Did I mention buttocks?

    Don’t use the following words or phrases: you guys, whore, idiot, insane, retardiferous, gals, honey, tits, swine-people, Third World, Conan, push-up bra, bobo, Audie Murphy, infield fly rule, broad, bitchcraft, ballshaft, Remember the Maine, normal, buttocks.

  23. Trying to vote on the merits, but every time they open their mouths, the urge to burn it all down becomes overwhelming….

  24. In the last few months, I’ve been seeing more and more pushback against SJWs. Even in the comments at Tor.com. Now, I don’t know how responsible things like Sad Puppies are for this, but I think it’s all part of the same zeitgeist. People are getting fed up with every discussion getting hijacked to promote the latest grievance of the social justice crowd.

    You thought GamerGate and Sad Puppies were big? You ain’t seen nothing yet.

    1. I hope so. At this point I am so tired of the SJB that I want to see them crushed, driven before me and to ignore their lamentations.

    2. What was real interesting to me was GRRM asking when we were going to “do something” about Vox Day. The SJBs tried to silence him by scorning him, and it didn’t work. As Vox himself has pointed out, they’ve also failed in their attempt to silence the Gamergaters with the same tactics. They’re getting desperate.

      1. When’s GRRM going to do something about 40 SJW anti-white, anti-male morons I could mention who keep getting nominated for awards?

  25. Vote for global white privilege, compulsory heterosexuality and the Patriarchy. Systemic exclusion, punching down and oppression is the basis of all art and fun. Celebrate lack of diversity and remember neopronouns make it hard for cis people to take trans people seriously, which is good. Somewhere in there is literature and blah, blah, blah. How boring.

    1. Damien Walter, who ate lead paint chips off the wall of his mother’s flat, when he was a lad. (chuckle)

    2. Any time a race gender warrior gives you a ready-made Orwellian title like “N. K. Jemisin: Upending the ‘racist sexist status quo'” it is confirmation there is no irony in Moronville. That’s what The Guardian is flogging at us once again, even though the author Noah Berlatsky and Jemisin have been so thoroughly discredited I don’t know why they bother.

      “Celebrated fantasy novels?” Celebrated by who?

      Aside from a writer stupidly confusing nepotism with affirmative action, the additional irony of the article itself being yet more affirmative action is lost on these great minds. Jemisin’s make-work job at some school is usually the kind of employment you see on The Sopranos, so that makes her double the crucial cog you never would’ve heard of were it not for her true talent: complaining and producing nothing society wants or needs.

  26. Greetings puppies!

    Are there any Sad Puppies proponents out there who have reviewed and blogged about this year’s noms? As a non-puppy I’d like to read about your views on literature to be able to wrap my head around what you think is missing from the Hugos of previous years. Perhaps the most interesting reviews would be ones that deal with the categories with both puppy and non-puppy works, like Best Graphic Story.

    I’d be grateful if you would link to Sad Puppy blogs (could be your own)!

    1. For myself, I’ve considered it, but I’m not sure I want to field the backlash from the puppy kickers. If I do codify the notes I have, I have no intention of posting those reviews until everything’s all said and done. Especially since I’m more concerned with finishing everything I can and voting in as many categories as I can before the deadline.

  27. “I can say with a fair amount of certainty that Laura is plainly the best writer of the five nominees… but there’s more to my choice than that. In this year of all years, with Puppygate turning so toxic and hatespeech spreading all over the internet, it behooves us more than ever to honor someone who spoke up AGAINST Hate and for healing, not by spewing vitriol in retaliation, but calmly, dispassionately, with clean hands and composure and… most of all… compassion. A victory for Mixon here would have huge symbolic value, I think; a vote for her is a vote for decency, and a vote against the trolls and haters of all stripes and persuasions, be they left-wing or right-wing or just loony.” – GRRM

    Anyone who’s read Mixon’s routinely disturbed non-fiction writing knows her ideological phobia of men, whites and heterosexuals verges on paranoid and would certainly be considered homophobic, misogynist and racist were they presented in reverse. Mixon’s views are not one whit different from Requires Hate’s. Martin’s portrayal of Mixon providing some noble function in the SFF community is itself disturbing and reveals a man who apparently has no principles whatsoever. “Decency”? GLAAD, the SPLC and ADL were created to combat that sort of “decency.” If these people are speaking up against hate and for healing then save us from these low-rent minds.

    I’d again caution against this liberal vs. conservative thing. I see nothing “liberal” about U. K. folks like Liz Bourke, Alex Daffy MacFarlane, Damien Walter and Foz Meadows lighting us up for being heteronormative and male. That’s not politics of any sort; it’s nothing more than identity supremacy dressed up as politics. In any event, the idea ice cold conformist rednecks like Scalzi, Leckie, Hurley, GRRM and Hines are liberals is a laugh track.

  28. A vote for Sad Puppies is a vote against racial incitement. Here, let me spell that out for our new generation of “SFF” writers: R-A-C-I-A-L I-N-C-I-T-E-M-E-N-T.

    I’ve seen more racial incitement from Hugo nominees and their ditzy supporters in the last 4 years than all the fucking Confederate flags in America. That’s not including non-stop daily head-banging incitement from shit gender feminists to hate men. That includes that fuckbucket called “Tor.”

    Please take your pronouns like “cis” and shove ’em up your ass.

    1. James,
      Allow me to (maybe) brighten your day. So, there I was, no sh**, on Google play looking at books. Up popped a new novel recommendation that I had already decided to bypass. I was skipping it because the publishing house editor recently referred to me and fans like me as Neo-Nazis.

      Sound familiar?

      Well, I had clicked on that book cover and lo and behold, I noticed something odd. The three letter name for that Progressive infested, F-bucket of a company was no longer listed as the publisher. Instead they were now listed simply as “Macmillan”.

      Maybe nothing, maybe just a coincidence. Could be someone is feeling the burn along the profit margin. I know what I’d like to think.

      1. But there was an article printed less than 24 hours after the boycott from a known Puppy-kicker began saying it had failed miserably! They wouldn’t lie, would they?

        1. Nope! They are as honest as a Clinton tax return.

          “Liar, liar, pantsuit on fire!”

        1. If that is true then I think the boycott is damning them. Honestly, I like RS Belcher’s Tarot series but I refused to buy his latest Tor book. Tor has successfully made a marketing campaign that has alienated me. I am not boycotting per se but I am not looking for them either and when I see another book that I like I buy it. I might change my mind in a few years but for now I don’t care to even look their way. Screw em.

          I’ve voted. I feel pretty good about the whole deal. I don’t care what the results are I am glad that I did my part. I would like to see the Puppy picks get a strong winning sweep but I don’t underestimate the hate from the left. They hate us folks.

        2. David Weber’s “Safehold” series. All the hardbacks (listed on Google-play) I have are all stamped Tor. Now, they are all stamped Macmillan. A few weeks ago the pre order for the new release was also Tor, now it also shows Macmillan as the publisher instead.

  29. Done putting the last touches on my vote. It was a lot of work, even though I found some good reads along the way and discovered some new authors to follow.

  30. Voting for Sad Puppies even on nothing more than principle may not reflect the best stories this year but it is a step in the right direction: a return to artistry for art’s sake. You will at least not be voting for racial revenge fantasies, reflections of narcissistic identity disorders, paranoia of one’s fellow human beings, and the sick supremacist notion half of all humans on Earth are morally superior to the other.

    We do not need to support writers who lament how much one race dominates a hobby globally while otherwise ignoring the issue altogether if it is the proper race. We do not need to support editors who lament how their job makes them read stories by an improper race while otherwise ignoring the issue altogether if the proper race is affected.

    We do not need to support naive and sick-minded people who have turned an innocuous hobby into a platform for their equally naive and sick notions about art and humanity. We do not need to support morons who claim right is one thing on a Saturday, wrong on Sunday and back to right on Monday based on a logic and morality so empty-headed as to be indecipherable.

    Send a message and send this sick supremacist racist cult packing and back under whatever medieval rock it crawled out from under.

Comments are closed.